McCowan, A and Mohamed, S (2002) A classification of decision support systems (DSSs) for the Analysis and evaluation of concession project investments (CPIs). Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 7(2), pp. 127-137. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Privately financed infrastructure projects procured via concession contracts are receiving more and more attention as governments around the world struggle to fund vital public works. The concession approach can present a win-win solution for both private and public sector participants. However, this has not been the case in many countries, mainly due to the inability of project sponsors and promoters to predict the impact of all monetary and non-monetary risk factors associated with concession project investments (CPIs). This paper argues that decision support systems (DSSs) that can be used to facilitate such prediction during the process of project risk evaluation are limited in their practical applications for various reasons. The paper classifies and critically reviews available DSSs according to the framework structure they are based on. In doing so, the paper highlights the need for a DSS that is effective in modelling all of the identified aspects of CPIs, in an efficient manner. Finally, it promotes the Analytic Network Process (ANP) in conjunction with the possibility theory, as an optimal basis for the development of such a DSS.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision support system, concession project investment, risk factors, uncertainty |
| Index terms: | public work, risk factor, infrastructure project, analytic network process, modelling, public sector, concession contract, promoter, project sponsor, decision support |
| Subjects: | environmental hazards, decision-making and optimization, infrastructure engineering, analytical methods, contract type, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative law, decision analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here